When she was in fifth grade, Scarlett Goddard Strahan started to worry about getting wrinkles.

By the time she turned 10, Scarlett and her friends were spending hours on TikTok and YouTube watching influencers tout products for achieving today’s beauty aesthetic: a dewy, “glowy,” flawless complexion. Scarlett developed an elaborate skin care routine with facial cleansers, mists, hydrating masks and moisturizers.

One night, Scarlett’s skin began to burn intensely and erupted in blisters. Heavy use of adult-strength products had wreaked havoc on her skin. Months later, patches of tiny bumps remain on Scarlett’s face, and her cheeks turn red in the sun.

“I didn’t want to get wrinkles and look old,” says Scarlett, who recently turned 11. “If I had known my life would be so affected by this, I never would have put these things on my face.”

The skin care obsession offers a window into the role social media plays in the lives of today’s youth and how it shapes the ideals and insecurities of girls in particular. Girls are experiencing high levels of sadness and hopelessness. Whether social media exposure causes or simply correlates with mental health problems is up for debate. But to older teens and young adults, it’s clear: Extended time on social media has been bad for them, period.

    • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is also the fault of gov’ts who don’t crack down on businesses and advertisers who target kids.

      At this rate unfettered capitalism is gonna kill us all, sooner rather than later.

      • WIZARD POPE💫@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        I guess. But if the parents just explained why doing that is bad and maybe prohibited her from doing it, it would not have gone this badly. Sure the cause is not the parents fault directly. But by their inaction they contributed more than tiktok.

            • Rosoe@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              The article does not mention what interventions the parents tried. But no, just doing something is not always better than being patient - especially with kids.

              • DeviantOvary@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                2 months ago

                Not in detail, but it actually does:

                “Often the mothers are saying exactly what I am but need their child to hear it from an expert,” says Dr. Dendy Engelman, a Manhattan dermatologist. “They’re like, ‘Maybe she’ll listen to you because she certainly doesn’t listen to me.’”

                While younger kids may be reasoned with, teenagers aren’t as easy to handle as some say. Puberty is a hell of a drug.

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, banning a kid from doing something ‘everyone else is doing’ is a sure-fire way to find out if they follow orders.

          Hint: 90% won’t

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Man have you ever worked with kids? They’re not some unreasoning automatons that treat “rebel against authority” with the same overriding obedience as “kill all humans”. If you explain things to them like rational actors, out of all demograpics, they are by far the most likely to treat what you’re saying with reasoned consideration.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Yes they will. Banning them from something is not discussing the pros and cons with them tho.

      • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        No sick of that shit. This 100% on her parents. No way a 10 year old was buying all that junk. Government doesn’t need to police every goddamm thing.

        Darwinsim needs to make a come back. Probably why we have so many stupid fucking people in this world. Because we have to me warnings and Government over reach.

        Who ever her Guardians are should have warned her or not provided these products.

        • blargbluuk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          Who ever her Guardians are should have warned her or not provided these products.

          Maybe they did warn her, or didn’t directly provide the products, kids are a bit more complicated most of the time.

        • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You don’t want the government to police advertisements to kids, like we already do with television.

          Instead, you think Darwinism should police them with death? Really?

    • Tyfud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not solely. Kids shouldn’t have such an unhealthy image and mindset pushed by the array of social media influencers out there. It’s always easier to blame the parents, and they certainly have some responsibility here and shouldn’t be absolved; but it’s a symptom of a much deeper problem in our society that lets this happen.

      Kids will get things from other kids to do/try behind their parents back, tale as old as time. We need to fight against the portrayal of beauty standards being equated to the value of a woman.

      After we do that, then it’s solely on the parents. But not until then.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      10-year-olds have allowances. They can walk down the street to the drugstore or supermarket if they live in a city. The parents may not have known.

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Aww man, squiddy you know this argument is specious. Yes children have allowances, but popular beauty products are expensive even by adult standards. For a kid to have access to the beauty products in question in the referenced quantities suggests a serious lack of parental oversight coupled with an undue and unchecked influence from predatory apps like tiktok. While yeah it’s not toally in the realm of the X-Files for a child to develop a makeup addiction, I think it’s much more likely that this is a case of severe parental neglect being overblown for clickbait than a serious social epidemic.

        • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          well there is always a cheap and crappy version of whatever beauty product you are looking for and those are even more likely to cause harm. But I imagine if a kid is trying to apply ten different skin care products a day, even a slightly attentive parent would notice in time.

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Sure, and I won’t deny that there’s a problem to be addressed here. I just don’t think it’s the problem that’s being implied in the article. When I was in highschool, several classmates had severe skin problems caused by trying to use a homemade clorox paste to ‘erase’ their freckles. Another guy was hospitalized for trying to use ‘comet’ as a tooth whitening solution (my highschool also had a problem with cows from the neighboring pastures wandering in to eat the flowers in the planters, though, so maybe it’s not the best example to use here. They learned how to use the wheelchair buttons. The ranhers eventually dug a ditch to stop them, which didn’t stop the cows wandering but did provide a place for people to go and have sex during school hours. Yeah, it was a ‘sex ditch’ highschool. What was I talking about.)

            My point is that children are idiots, have always been idiots and are always going to be idiots. I love them, and they’re much smarter than most people give them credit for, but still. The real issue here isn’t that they’re finding new and different ways in which to be idiots, but that parents aren’t willing (or more likely, aren’t able due to time, money or social pressures) to provide enough oversight to prevent said childhood dumbassery. The underlaying issues here are way more complex than ‘tiktok bad’, and those are what need addressing. Confiscating smartphones from kids (as some people here seem almost gleeful to advocate) is just a socially convenient way to not take responsibility for actually parenting your children, and denies them a vital tool for interacting with the modern world. It does far more harm than good. A fifteen minute conversation about the strategies tiktok uses to influence them will have more positive benefit on their lives than taking away their phones ever, ever would.

            • WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Great points.

              Vaping is another example. Despite being aged restricted, kids still get their hands on vapes.

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            A container of Hydramoist is $30 at my local Sephora, though you can get it cheaper (and more likely to be counterfiet!) online. Most of the other stuff referenced I couldn’t find the exact products (I didn’t try super hard) but they’re in the $10-$20 each range. It’s not bank breaking, but it’s certainly more money than the average ten year old has laying around.

            I think this article raises very valid concerns about the extreme influence the beauty industry is having on younger and younger people, and I have no doubt the girls referenced here were subject to that influence, and I am not arguing that influence needs to be much more strictly regulated. In this case, it seems extremely sensationalized to claim that its common for ten year olds to have the resources needed to develop a serious addiction to popular skincare products. Really, it feels like something from the DARE era, but with “marajuana” replaced with “sephora”.